Borrowing, Part 1
Borrow means to take and use something that belongs to someone else for a period of time and then return it”
Observing the built environment in both large and small American cities, including rural places, the idea of ownership seems to evade the concept of sharing space, a likely result of monetary and privacy concerns. Public or common space tends to remain in the public trust, and rarely do the two co-exist, except at the street to development. The streetscape is currently where form-based zoning is focused, but misses sharing spaces and amenities within development programs since they are self-administered. Hence, the very idea of borrowing land, space, and amenities, is a unique idea within an American development zeitgeist. Why build an amenity when a neighbor can provide the same amenity?
The concept of borrowing can be evidenced through various adjacencies and project types, uncovering new spatial relationships that suggest how property lines, ownership, and development is organized. The organization of space within the pressing demands of de-carbonation, reduction of waste, access to green space, and walkability, align with borrowing namely due to the fluid transfer of spatial ideas and adjacencies that add- and subtract- from existing relationships to create a dynamic development environment of opportunities. Thusly, borrowing on small or large scales can be an effective means to address current issues within development - at any scale.
Recently, I had an opportunity to conceptualize a condominium tower in New York City. The site, a postage-sized lot in lower Manhattan, was an opportunity to borrow amenities from the neighborhood, in lieu of providing the same amenities in a limited building footprint. The lot is bound on its three sides by large scale industrial and residential uses. But the residential development to the west has at its center, an expansive green space. Said green space was leveraged to be a garden space for the new condominium. The lower floors are design to leverage this adjacent amenity specifically, while the upper floors take advantage of the New York Skyline views.
In lieu of including building amenities such as parking and a gym, research of the surrounding neighborhood amenities located multiple gym and coffee houses, all with parking nearby. These amenities could then be removed from the building program, which aimed to increase the number of units and maximize square footage. Because of NYC zoning allowances, the cellar space is not included in the building’s Floor Area Ratio (FAR), which was initially envisioned as dry retail space. Upon touring NYC, the pocket parks that include a water fountain and public seating, were viewed as a more life affirming amenity. The water fountain was placed at the back of the site at the adjacent building’s imposing brick wall. With the combination of water, landscaping, and natural light, the cellar and lower levels of this project begin to rival that of the upper floors, with protected interior views and privacy.
In this development project, the simple notion of borrowing from the existing amenities, determined a basis-for-design that increases the value of the project, while avoiding the redundant approach of self-contained building amenities. The reliance of any development’s self-containment, denies the potency of the location’s full potential , its access to transportation, vibrant shopping, and people watching, which in turn, isolates the end-users into static relationships with the surrounding neighborhood.
Because something is borrowed, it never really belongs to the person or entity doing the borrowing. This simple proposition results in instability, which is more dynamic in nature, since the desired environment of the borrower may change over time.